The Monuments Men

We saw The Monuments Men tonight, the first WW II movie I’ve seen in a while. I noticed that it's only at a 33 on Rotten Tomatoes and a tepid 6.8 on IMDB. I enjoyed it anyway. It’s worth noting that we went to one theater that was sold out for both shows, and bought the last two tickets in another theater. At the end of the flick the audience applauded, which seems to point to a popular, if not critical hit.

It really was a 1950’s movie, having that sort of moral clarity that you only see in WW II movies and the light, witty style of war movies of that era that glosses over the fundamental horror and apocalyptic brutality of that conflict. It reminded me of movies like the Guns of Navarone or The Great Escape. The Monuments Men are a group of art guys enlisted into the army for the purpose of recovering art that has been looted by the Nazis. By hook and crook, they seek out and recover stolen art, with the lofty goal of saving European high culture for the ages. George Clooney directs and acts as the lead character. I thought he was channeling Clark Gable. It’s that sort of role and he looks the part, especially with his slick hair and thin mustache. Other stars that stud the cast include Cate Blanchett, Bill Murray, Matt Damon, John Goodman and Jean Dujardin.

From what I know, the story has somewhat of a fact/book basis, although there were really something like 120 Monuments Men, not just the 8 in the movie and it IS true that Hitler ordered all captured art destroyed if he was killed. I guess it was necessary to condense events and characters. For my part, I enjoyed the anachronistic aspects of the movie, didn’t consider it to be a serious exploration of WW II and art so much as an engaging story about a small aspect of something that really happened. The anachronistic aspects of the movie might have worked even a little better in black and white, to give a period feel. If you’re in the mood for World War Lite, this could be for you.

I saw The Monuments Men today and felt it should have been a better film. It wasn't terrible, but I was expecting a bit more from Clooney. I've got no problem with 'World War Lite' but did you not think the tone shifted a bit too much? We did get to see real blood and quite a bit of death and that felt slightly out of place with the sort of Great Escape vibe that it started with. Anyway, here's my review:

A well intentioned 2nd World War drama cast in the mould of a 'classic' war film. But after a jovial start it quickly loses its fizz. There are too many main characters to care about and too much faffing around with no sense of urgency. It looks good though, and the story of how the Nazis robbed the cream of European art is an interesting one, but this isn't the movie for it.

4/10

Agreed. Tone shifted too often and too forcefully. I suppose that's what happens when you bring in a 110-piece orchestra to stand in for...well...an actual plot.

Clooney's frame was obsessed with the ensemble cast, filling the frame with individual close-ups so often that it I found it nearly impossible to believe that a single one of them was playing an actual character. I can hear the stage directions in my head: "Okay, Mr. Goodman, now in this scene we need Sad Face."

Cate Blanchett did have an accent, so I suppose that means she came closer than anyone else. I can't however for the life of me understand why she would take part in a movie where her character's only (semi)significant moment is making an unsuccessful pass at Linus Caldwell. I can say something similar about Bill Murray's role, my only viable theory being that he had lost a bet some years earlier.

Overall a pretty good flick if you're into the french horn.